Physician Assisted Suicide Summary

Others have argued that physician assisted suicide is not ethically permissible, because it contradicts the traditional duty of physician’s to preserve life and to do no harm. Furthermore, many argue that if physician assisted suicide is legalized, abuses would take place, because as social forces condone the practice, it will lead to “slippery slope” that forces (PAS) on the disabled, elderly, and the poor, instead of providing more complex and expensive palliative care. While these arguments continue with no end in sight, more and more of the terminally ill cry out in agony, for the right to end their own suffering.

Assisted suicide is an extremely controversial issue both in Canada and countries around the world. In most of the world, assisted suicide is still illegal, but there appears to be some movement towards its legalization. Regardless of this shift towards the possible legalization of assisted suicide, there is still substantial resistance and debate regarding the issue. On one hand, those who support assisted suicide mostly use the ethical argument that everyone should have the right to choose how and when they die and that they should be able to die with dignity. Another factor is the “quality of life” issue, which means a person should no longer have to live, if they feel their life is no longer worth living. On the contrary, the argument against

Assisted suicide is a topic that has ignited a severe debate due to the controversy that surrounds its implementation. Assisted suicide occurs when a patients expresses their intention to die and request a physician to assist them in the process. Some countries like Oregon, Canada, and Belgium have legalized the process terming it as an alternative to prolonged suffering for patients who are bound to die. Unlike euthanasia where a physician administers the process, assisted suicide requires that the patient voluntarily initiates and executes the process. Although there exists concession such a process is important to assist patients die without much suffering, there has emerged criticism on its risk of abuse and as an expression of medical

In this chapter we get to see how Lia's fate has really taken a toll on her parents. We also see that the Lee's no longer feel like they can rely on the American medical system after what happened to Lia and instead they would use their own at home methods. Lia's pediatric neurologist also believed that the Lee's might have been right about Lia being affected from too much medication. After hearing this and looking at Lia's records, Neil and Peggy came to the realization that there should have treated her differently. This chapter really demonstrates the importance of culture and the need for doctors to be more accepting and understand of them. Unfortunately, there are doctors who are just not willing to comply. It is sad to see how much the Lee's had to suffer in order for people to open their eyes and it is even sadder that even with cases like this, there are doctors who still refuse to believe in anything outside their medical abilities.

As humans, we have the right to life. In Canada, in section 7 of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canadians can expect “life, liberty and security of the person.” This means not only to simply exist, but have a minimum quality and value in each of our lives. Dying is the last important, intimate, and personal moment, and this process of dying is part of life. Whether death is a good or bad thing is not the question, as it is obviously inevitable, but as people have the right to attempt to make every event in their life pleasant, so they should have the right to make their dying as pleasant as possible. If this process is already very painful and unpleasant, people should have the right to shorten the unpleasantness. In February of this year, judges declared that the right to life does not mean individuals “cannot ‘waive’ their right to life.” Attempting suicide is not illegal in Canada, but the issue here is for those whose physical handicaps prevent them from doing so, and to allow access to a safe, regulated and painless form of suicide. It is a very difficult, sensitive and much-debated subject which seeks to balance the value of life with personal autonomy. In this essay, I will argue that the philosophical case for pro-euthanasia is more complete than those arguments against it due to the

In a momentous decision released February 6, 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Physician-assisted suicide will be legal in Canada within 12 months. This deci-sion has caused a myriad of controversy. Opponents of physician-assisted suicide argue that the constitution recognizes the sanctity of life and no one has the right to end the life of another person’s. Supporters, on the other hand, argue that patients who experience constant pain and misery due to health issues must be allowed to have the right to die with dignity of their own choices. This means it is necessary for the government to take measures to protect the right of those people who suffer. Though both arguments offer val-id points, it is absolutely crucial that all human beings should be entitled the essential right to be painlessly and safely relieved of suffering caused by incurable diseases.

At the heart of the debate of doctor assisted suicide is the supreme court trial of Carter v Canada. This was the catalyst which lead to the national legalization of assisted suicide. One of the major arguments against this law was that of the safeguards and regulations needed to protect Canadians from harm. Proponents against physician assisted suicide believe that any bill that are created for such a cause will have “inadequacy of safeguards and the potential to devalue human life” (Carter v Canada, 344). Thus, leaving those who are pro-assisted suicide require to create guidelines and protections for all parties involved with process. Allowing for there to be proper and adequate safeguards for assisted suicide is of vital importance to this law as it is these safeguards are the foundation of the assisted suicide law.

Thesis: When it comes to the topic of physician-assisted suicide (PAS), some experts believe that an individual should have the option of ending their life in the event that they have been given six months to live with a terminal illness or when the quality of their life has been vastly changed. Where this argument usually ends, however, is on the question whether physician-assisted suicide is medically ethical, would be overly abused to the point where doctors might start killing patients without their consent. Whereas some experts are convinced that just improving palliative care would decrease the need for someone to want to end their life before it happened naturally.

Taking a pro approach for physician assisted suicide, Jones’s article delivers the facts to why physician assisted suicide becomes legal. Physician assisted suicide is indeed legal in five U.S states such as, California, Oregon, Washington, Vermont, and Colorado. Rather than the article being good or bad, this text is highly biased. Jones provides facts to why physician assisted suicide should be legalized. Applying this article helps provide factual evidence about the Death with Dignity laws.

It is mostly debated that as an expression of autonomy i.e. one’s right to make independent choices without any external influences, a competent adult can refuse medical treatment, even in situations where this could result in his/her death. However, when it comes to actively ending a life via euthanasia it becomes an extensively debate regarding the rights of an individual to make that choice. The article “A Doctor-Assisted Disaster for Medicine” loosely examines the negative implications of assisted suicide laws on patients. Toffler’s article sheds light upon how the law has changed the relationship between patients and their medical provider.

A Canadian study determined that terminally ill patients were most concerned with existential suffering as a result of deteriorating health status and the inability to make their own medical decisions. Health care should be structured in a manner that allows the patient to make fully informed decisions and we should legally be able to respect them. As nursing students, we have been taught the importance of providing care in a manner that empowers the patient and supports patient autonomy. Healthcare is no longer paternalistic and the patient has the right to make informed decisions regarding treatments, medications and ultimately the right to live. Denying the patient’s rights to make decisions about their own life serves nobody’s interests. The Supreme Court is delaying making the final decision regarding Medically-Assisted Suicide due to the fact that there have been physicians that strongly oppose the act and 63% of physicians have voted that they would not participate due to conscientious objection. Some physicians feel as if legalizing an act of allowing the patient cause themselves harm would compromise the physician-patient relationship, however data from a state that has legalized medically assisted dying shows that patients are more likely to become upset by physicians who oppose and refuse medically assisted suicide more than by physicians who support it. Ultimately, due to their wishes not being respected and refused due to the beliefs of the

Euthanasia and physician assisted suicide are both types of medical assistance aiding in ending a suffering patient’s life. This pain may be due to a terminal illness and suffering as well as those in an irreversible coma. This practice of doctor assisted suicide is illegal in many countries, but is increasing in popularity as people start to recognize the positive aspects that euthanasia has to offer for those that fit the criteria. Euthanasia is essential for those, placed in such life diminishing situations, and whom no longer want to experience suffering. This is where the issue gets complicated, and many religious groups argue that individuals should not have the legal right to choose whether they get to die or not, but that it is simply in God’s hands. Suffering patients argue that they should be given the right to choose whether or not they have to experience this suffering, to end their life with the dignity they still have, and to alleviate the stress that their deteriorating life conditions have on their families, themselves and the entire healthcare system. Therefore, despite the many arguments, euthanasia can have a very positive impact on the lives and families of suffering individuals, as well as the Canadian healthcare system.

Even with the legalization of assisted suicide, reasonable laws can be constructed which prevent abuse and still protect the value of human life. Josh Sanburn in “The Last Choice” argues against the preconceived notion that suicide devalues the life of a human, but

Euthanasia and assisted suicide is a highly controversial topic because it literally deals with the matters of life and death. Once the procedure is done on a patient, it cannot be undone. In Canada, the issue on this topic has been discussed time and time again. The documentary The Trouble With Dying goes in depth on several patients and medical professionals as well as what their perspective on the subject is. Through this documentary, the audience was able to have an eye -opening experience and piece together their own viewpoint on the matter.

Ms. Tse and my fellow classmates, ever since Australia was introduced to euthanasia and assisted suicide, it has been an issue of pronounced controversial discussions due to diverse public opinion and highly paced religious intolerance. Euthanasia is fundamentally an avenue that allows a patient to make a choice to end their life peacefully and with dignity by consuming a lethal dose of Pentobarbital or sodium thiopental. Unconsciousness then follows, promptly accompanied by respiratory arrest and cardiac arrest, usually within 30 seconds. Observers generally describe the method as leading to a clear cut and peaceful death. And friends, every citizen of Australia should be permitted to make that crucial decision to be able to end their suffering. We are all ‘safeguarded’ by the ‘right to privacy’ and what is more private than the approach in which we choose to live our lives, and irrevocably depart this world? Dr Philip Nitschke who is the ‘face of assisted suicide in Australia’ (ABC, 2015) supports voluntary euthanasia; and one of his critically ill patient Jamie Hargraves who had been